Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PEGGING OUT A CLAIM,

ACTION FOR ASSAULT AND TEESPASS. At the Gore Court on Thursday, before Mr H. A. Stratford, S.M., Horace Simsbn charged Andrew Harvey with assault on July 12, .and made application for sureties of the peace. Mr Neave for informant, and Mr Bowler for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Mr Neave, in opening, stated that the informant, at the request of Donald Simson, who held a miner's right, and was an applicant for a mining privilege, proceeded to defendant's perpetual leasehold at Waikaka, for the purpose of pegging off a mining claim. Defendant refused to allow the pegging to go on, threatened informant with a crowbar, and with it knocked the pegs from his hand. As it was necessary that the ground should bo visited frequently for the purposo of maintaining the pegs, it was prayed that defendant be bound over to keep the peace. Mr Bowler contended that as a question of title was involved, the magistrate (under section 19 of the Indictable Offences Act) had no jurisdiction to hear tho information. Mr Neave held that as section 19 of the Mining Act gave full powers to entei upon leaseholds, the" question of title did not arise. Mr Bowler said that dofendant denied the right of informant to go on tho land at all, therefore th-e question of title did arise. The magistrate said that if ho discovered that defendant, under'a presumed right, moved Simson off his land with sufficient force, he would consider tho question of jurisdiction. Mr Neave then said that to save tho time of tho court he would admit that the magistrate had no jurisdiction. — Case dismissed accordingly, no costs being allowed. Andrew Harvey v. H. Simson. — This waa an action for trespass arising out of the previous case. Mr Bowler for plaintiff and Mr Neave for defendant. Mr Bowler said ho was prepared to withdraw the information provided counsel for defendant would not ask for costs. Mr Neave asked for costs, on the ground that ho was ready to proceed with the case, and had his witnesses in attendance. Tho magistrate said if the case were withdrawn, 10s 6d costs to defendant's counsel would bo allowed. Mr Bowler consented to this, and the caso was withdrawn accordingly. — Mataura En- : sign.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OW18990727.2.45.10

Bibliographic details

Otago Witness, Issue 2369, 27 July 1899, Page 24

Word Count
379

PEGGING OUT A CLAIM, Otago Witness, Issue 2369, 27 July 1899, Page 24

PEGGING OUT A CLAIM, Otago Witness, Issue 2369, 27 July 1899, Page 24

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert